ArticleScientific reports2024
A bi-level framework for real-time crash risk forecasting using artificial intelligence-based video analytics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study proposes a bi-level framework for real-time crash risk forecasting (RTCF) for signalised intersections, leveraging the temporal dependency among crash risks of contiguous time slices. At the first level of RTCF, a non-stationary generalised extreme value (GEV) model is developed to estimate the rear-end crash risk in real time (i.e., at a signal cycle level). Artificial intelligence techniques, like YOLO and DeepSort were used to extract traffic conflicts and time-varying covariates from traffic movement videos at three signalised intersections in Queensland, Australia. The estimated crash frequency from the non-stationary GEV model is compared against the historical crashes for the study locations (serving as ground truth), and the results indicate a close match between the estimated and observed crashes. Notably, the estimated mean crashes lie within the confidence intervals of observed crashes, further demonstrating the accuracy of the extreme value model. At the second level of RTCF, the estimated signal cycle crash risk is fed to a recurrent neural network to predict the crash risk of the subsequent signal cycles. Results reveal that the model can reasonably estimate crash risk for the next 20-25 min. The RTCF framework provides new pathways for proactive safety management at signalised intersections.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.